[jonathan c]

One of the original Gjallarhorn JM Edition in Baltic Sea: kicking (b)ass and taking names…

 

[eugene2]

Looks like an Arctic cable on the JME. Whigh cable is it? I just bought a Magnus for my LSA Diamond to my Questyle QP2. Thinking about the Integra for he JME

 

[rlawry]

I have a JME Mark 2 and the best headphone cable I have heard with it by far is the Synergistic Foundation cable. Big and propulsive with a lot of detail but not bright and edgy.

 

[rlawry]

That should read Synergistic Research Foundation cable.

 

[jonathan c]

The headphone cable is Norne Audio Vykari - a copper / silver interwoven hybrid.

 

[wazzupi]

XD, it’s been a treat !! I’m enjoying my time with the lcd-5 and Weiss 502 both are excellent and I’d say endgame for most people. Rognir is more similar than different to the lcd 5.

 

[DeweyCH]

XD, it’s been a treat !! I’m enjoying my time with the lcd-5 and Weiss 502 both are excellent and I’d say endgame for most people. Rognir is more similar than different to the lcd 5.

Those stabilized Rognirs are hot as hell.

 

[ardbeg1975]

I just sent a message about tuning it further with a gray dark dense neoprene foam vs the white foam inside the ear pad or trying it with no foam inside the ear pads- all of these have slight tuning differences - the foam just takes up space top seal the ear pad and the headphone ring best - the lambs leather ear pads are still stock when removed- the neoprene can add more seal however - I like to seal as much as possible and the neoprene does that- the black is dense and the white foam (not shown) is lighter in density - both add more physical depth to the ear pad push the users ear away from the driver - and the neoprene ring can be used other headphones such as the Rognir Dynamic or Magni to add more depth to the pad and the separate the users ear (if that makes sense)

Wanted to take this opportunity to again call attention to @John Massaria ’s “Rögnir” headband treatment on the Gjallarhorn GH 50 JM and his “mark 2” tuning mod. Thank you again John. They continue to sound and look awesome.

 

[rlawry]

Wanted to take this opportunity to again call attention to @John Massaria ’s “Rögnir” headband treatment on the Gjallarhorn GH 50 JM and his “mark 2” tuning mod. Thank you again John. They continue to sound and look awesome.

Yep, the Mark 2 mods of my Gjallarhorn GH50 JMEs has left me wanting nothing in sonics. Detail, dynamics, spaciousness, liquidity, bass, midrange body, sweet treble, it is all there.

 

[Alien HP]

Wanted to take this opportunity to again call attention to @John Massaria ’s “Rögnir” headband treatment on the Gjallarhorn GH 50 JM and his “mark 2” tuning mod. Thank you again John. They continue to sound and look awesome.

I also would like to thank Kennerton for the GH50 and their awesome customer support.

And of course, I thank Mr. Massaria for the MK2 upgrade. I would have to agree, the GH50 MK2 generates pretty enjoyable sound with great soundstage.

Just a few notes.

With the bent headband, it has a fair amount of clamping force. This may affect the overall comfort and your ears may be touching the white fiber glass material which isn't particularly soft and pleasant to touch with your ears. Since nobody has mentioned this, I guess it's just my problem and maybe my ears just stick out too much. I put these non-stock ear pads which come with a soft mesh fabric and they solved this problem for me. Only they are a bit large in diameter. I think any soft mesh fabric would solve this. I want to see if I can find and buy it anywhere and try it with the stock ear pads.

As for open ports in MK2, yes, with open ports there is noticeably more bass. And when I cover the ports with my fingers, the bass quantity is reduced. But as much as I like bass, I feel like the sound becomes more accurate and less boomy when the ports are closed. I guess my preference here depends on the music I am listening to. But I think it's great to have the ability to control it. Having small rubber plugs would be nice. I am thinking to put two small pieces of tape over the open ports.

Compared to the Denon AH-D9200, the resolution of the D9200 is higher. The D9200 allows to hear every little detail with a lot of clarity across the whole frequency range. However, it does this at the cost of harsh treble in some tracks. The GH50 doesn't have this problem. As @ardbeg1975 said earlier, it produces smooth non-fatiguing treble. Before the MK2 upgrade, I felt like the treble was somewhat muffled even. But I think the non-metal resonator of the MK2 edition improved it. I don't think I would want it any more crisp than it is now.

I only wish the GH50 was less bulky and lighter.

 

[tonedeafmelomaniac]

Hi everyone! Earlier in this thread I've read that Gjallarhorn and Magni have almost the same sound signature. But can we say the same thing about new Gjallarhorn 40? On the previous pages I've read that 40 has huge bass and now I'm worried about it. Won't it be too overwhelming?
These cans are priced almost the same and look less bulky than Gjallarhorn 50.
I also consider Denon 7200 and Beyerdynamic 700 pro x as a cheaper option. It would be nice if anyone could compare their sound signature to Magni, if such comparison is meaningful.
I'm not an audiophile and listen to music for fun. I'm also not a bass/treble head, but boring sound isn't appealing to me too.
Music preferences - mostly rock and metal.

 

[levap]

I have already been the owner of Stealth for a couple of months. There is no reason not to share my impressions in comparison with Rognir. Including analyzing the "comparison" on audiosciencereview. Let me remind you what it is, quote: “I was listening to my every day Dan Clark Stealth before switching to the Rognir and boy did it feel like someone turned the lights off! Every bit of life got sucked out of music with no highs. The sound was flat and boring with no spatial effects.”

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...on-rognir-review-closed-back-headphone.27362/

Let's start with burn-in. Or "burn-in". I haven't had such vivid impressions for a long time. And taking into account the review on ASR, I paid special attention to the process in the head.

Wearing headphones for the first time, I was somewhat puzzled and stunned - yes, cool, neutral and beautiful. But why is it so uncomfortable - the treble is too harsh and why the bass seems to be not frankly small (say, on electronics, it was "bludgeoned" to the extent of the pressure power immediately and out of the box), but still clearly not enough (for metal). Hands were actively reaching for the equalizer for the first couple of days, but it was decided to let the headphones (new) and ears (biological) warm up. I must say right away – in the second week there were no thoughts about the equalizer. The effect on highs was similar in meaning to the first connection after a week-long break in listening. Conclusions what kind of ”burn-in" works most, hardware or biological - I suggest those who wish to do it themselves )

And the comparison with Rognir. For my ears, the Rognir is somewhat brighter, sharper on the treble. Therefore, what was meant by "turned the lights off”, "music with no highs" is a mystery to me. I will assume a possible combination of bran new Rognir without burn-in plus an unsuitable source or individual hearing characteristics when switching from specific highs of Stealth. But in general, I would characterize the Stealth highs as more accurate, perhaps, although I do not have any formal complaints about Rognir. The mids of Stealth is a little more "glossy" and “transparent”, Rognir has an ”analog" and “velvety” in comparison, the difference here is more of a taste-ish. With the bass, it's more interesting - Stealth plays slightly slowly and softens the attacks, while Rognir gives more powerful, punchy, explosive transitions with a higher overall speed and resolution on the bass. In the energetic version, bass of Rognir is slightly more in volume than Stealth, in the standard version, perhaps a little less. Perhaps Stealth is also more correct on the bass, but Rognir is clearly more effective. The soundstage size of Rognir is not a record-breaker, but it is more voluminous than that of Stealth, however, I will also attribute the difference here to taste - the scaling looks quite consistent and proportional, I will not undertake to judge.

Which in the end we have. For me, Rognir are headphones for vivid emotions, maximally engaged listening. Rognir shoots you into the music without giving you a chance to sit on the sidelines. Stealth is rather a contemplative and subtle connoisseur. Builds an extremely verified and balanced sound landscape, extremely high-class, but still a little from the outside view. The phrase from ASR review - “Every bit of life got sucked out of music" looks doubly strange, in my experience, deliberately neutral headphones like Stealth usually look like this for the average listener, but not more motionally-charged-colored ones like Rognir. Alas, but Amir (the author of the review and the owner of the resource) apparently either has limited experience listening to (and not measuring) audio devices, if he obviously makes "childish" mistakes when comparing with listening. Or has an interest in writing as he wrote. And I will not undertake to choose which option is worse in this case…

 

[wazzupi]

I have already been the owner of Stealth for a couple of months. There is no reason not to share my impressions in comparison with Rognir. Including analyzing the "comparison" on audiosciencereview. Let me remind you what it is, quote: “I was listening to my every day Dan Clark Stealth before switching to the Rognir and boy did it feel like someone turned the lights off! Every bit of life got sucked out of music with no highs. The sound was flat and boring with no spatial effects.”

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kennerton-rognir-review-closed-back-headphone.27362/

Let's start with burn-in. Or "burn-in". I haven't had such vivid impressions for a long time. And taking into account the review on ASR, I paid special attention to the process in the head.

Wearing headphones for the first time, I was somewhat puzzled and stunned - yes, cool, neutral and beautiful. But why is it so uncomfortable - the treble is too harsh and why the bass seems to be not frankly small (say, on electronics, it was "bludgeoned" to the extent of the pressure power immediately and out of the box), but still clearly not enough (for metal). Hands were actively reaching for the equalizer for the first couple of days, but it was decided to let the headphones (new) and ears (biological) warm up. I must say right away – in the second week there were no thoughts about the equalizer. The effect on highs was similar in meaning to the first connection after a week-long break in listening. Conclusions what kind of ”burn-in" works most, hardware or biological - I suggest those who wish to do it themselves )

And the comparison with Rognir. For my ears, the Rognir is somewhat brighter, sharper on the treble. Therefore, what was meant by "turned the lights off”, "music with no highs" is a mystery to me. I will assume a possible combination of bran new Rognir without burn-in plus an unsuitable source or individual hearing characteristics when switching from specific highs of Stealth. But in general, I would characterize the Stealth highs as more accurate, perhaps, although I do not have any formal complaints about Rognir. The mids of Stealth is a little more "glossy" and “transparent”, Rognir has an ”analog" and “velvety” in comparison, the difference here is more of a taste-ish. With the bass, it's more interesting - Stealth plays slightly slowly and softens the attacks, while Rognir gives more powerful, punchy, explosive transitions with a higher overall speed and resolution on the bass. In the energetic version, bass of Rognir is slightly more in volume than Stealth, in the standard version, perhaps a little less. Perhaps Stealth is also more correct on the bass, but Rognir is clearly more effective. The soundstage size of Rognir is not a record-breaker, but it is more voluminous than that of Stealth, however, I will also attribute the difference here to taste - the scaling looks quite consistent and proportional, I will not undertake to judge.

Which in the end we have. For me, Rognir are headphones for vivid emotions, maximally engaged listening. Rognir shoots you into the music without giving you a chance to sit on the sidelines. Stealth is rather a contemplative and subtle connoisseur. Builds an extremely verified and balanced sound landscape, extremely high-class, but still a little from the outside view. The phrase from ASR review - “Every bit of life got sucked out of music" looks doubly strange, in my experience, deliberately neutral headphones like Stealth usually look like this for the average listener, but not more motionally-charged-colored ones like Rognir. Alas, but Amir (the author of the review and the owner of the resource) apparently either has limited experience listening to (and not measuring) audio devices, if he obviously makes "childish" mistakes when comparing with listening. Or has an interest in writing as he wrote. And I will not undertake to choose which option is worse in this case…

I appreciate your efforts into doing this comparison and review, I just can't stand that place man(asr)... you pretty much hit the nail on the head, I'd choose a Rognir at least with the bass tuning over any of these "neutral" headphones like the stealth, It's just what I prefer in taste and I'll leave it at that.

 

[godmax]

I have already been the owner of Stealth for a couple of months. There is no reason not to share my impressions in comparison with Rognir. Including analyzing the "comparison" on audiosciencereview. Let me remind you what it is, quote: “I was listening to my every day Dan Clark Stealth before switching to the Rognir and boy did it feel like someone turned the lights off! Every bit of life got sucked out of music with no highs. The sound was flat and boring with no spatial effects.”

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kennerton-rognir-review-closed-back-headphone.27362/

Let's start with burn-in. Or "burn-in". I haven't had such vivid impressions for a long time. And taking into account the review on ASR, I paid special attention to the process in the head.

Wearing headphones for the first time, I was somewhat puzzled and stunned - yes, cool, neutral and beautiful. But why is it so uncomfortable - the treble is too harsh and why the bass seems to be not frankly small (say, on electronics, it was "bludgeoned" to the extent of the pressure power immediately and out of the box), but still clearly not enough (for metal). Hands were actively reaching for the equalizer for the first couple of days, but it was decided to let the headphones (new) and ears (biological) warm up. I must say right away – in the second week there were no thoughts about the equalizer. The effect on highs was similar in meaning to the first connection after a week-long break in listening. Conclusions what kind of ”burn-in" works most, hardware or biological - I suggest those who wish to do it themselves )

And the comparison with Rognir. For my ears, the Rognir is somewhat brighter, sharper on the treble. Therefore, what was meant by "turned the lights off”, "music with no highs" is a mystery to me. I will assume a possible combination of bran new Rognir without burn-in plus an unsuitable source or individual hearing characteristics when switching from specific highs of Stealth. But in general, I would characterize the Stealth highs as more accurate, perhaps, although I do not have any formal complaints about Rognir. The mids of Stealth is a little more "glossy" and “transparent”, Rognir has an ”analog" and “velvety” in comparison, the difference here is more of a taste-ish. With the bass, it's more interesting - Stealth plays slightly slowly and softens the attacks, while Rognir gives more powerful, punchy, explosive transitions with a higher overall speed and resolution on the bass. In the energetic version, bass of Rognir is slightly more in volume than Stealth, in the standard version, perhaps a little less. Perhaps Stealth is also more correct on the bass, but Rognir is clearly more effective. The soundstage size of Rognir is not a record-breaker, but it is more voluminous than that of Stealth, however, I will also attribute the difference here to taste - the scaling looks quite consistent and proportional, I will not undertake to judge.

Which in the end we have. For me, Rognir are headphones for vivid emotions, maximally engaged listening. Rognir shoots you into the music without giving you a chance to sit on the sidelines. Stealth is rather a contemplative and subtle connoisseur. Builds an extremely verified and balanced sound landscape, extremely high-class, but still a little from the outside view. The phrase from ASR review - “Every bit of life got sucked out of music" looks doubly strange, in my experience, deliberately neutral headphones like Stealth usually look like this for the average listener, but not more motionally-charged-colored ones like Rognir. Alas, but Amir (the author of the review and the owner of the resource) apparently either has limited experience listening to (and not measuring) audio devices, if he obviously makes "childish" mistakes when comparing with listening. Or has an interest in writing as he wrote. And I will not undertake to choose which option is worse in this case…

Perception and hearing varies widely from person to person. For my part I can to some extend understand what Amir might perceive on the Rögnir as "..every bit of life got sucked out of music [...] sound was flat and boring with no spatial effects". With EQ applied he also finally concludes: "with equalization, it turns from a frog to a prince and so very acceptable and even great.". In fact, I use his EQ setting with my Rögnir mandatory (even I have the standard tuned version), without it I personally find the tuning not overly convincing (or to my liking) besides the great sound stage out-of-the-box. But with EQ I prefer the Rögnir very much (so much, that I also opted for the new Rögnir Dynamic blindly).

 

[Nostoi]

Perception and hearing varies widely from person to person. For my part I can to some extend understand what Amir might perceive on the Rögnir as "..every bit of life got sucked out of music [...] sound was flat and boring with no spatial effects". With EQ applied he also finally concludes: "with equalization, it turns from a frog to a prince and so very acceptable and even great.". In fact, I use his EQ setting with my Rögnir mandatory (even I have the standard tuned version), without it I personally find the tuning not overly convincing (or to my liking) besides the great sound stage out-of-the-box. But with EQ I prefer the Rögnir very much (so much, that I also opted for the new Rögnir Dynamic blindly).

I had forgotten about his review, but reading it back it's more farcical than I remember. The fact he conducts his tests with user modded pads would seem to render any EQ settings - to say nothing of his measurements and impressions - null and void.